Surcharge is 18 per cent annually until Social Security is funded for 75 years.

not that either of us would have a say. But I agree in principle. In my opinion, it would be a smart move on tfg's and President Leon to grab the opportunity to do just that while they're in control. Especially since a drastic move is inevitable. If they cut S.S. and medicare, then there will be hell to pay at the polls and support will wain within the party. On the other hand, if they control the numbers to minimize the reduction to their vast wealth they come out looking like heros and increase their popularity. Alternatively, if they do nothing and leave it to Democrats, we'll take everything we can and they'll look petty for fighting over pennies on the dollar while seniors go homeless, starve and die due to lack of proper affordable Healthcare. And Dems look like heros.

I agree, but I also think there would be more then problems at the polls. A door was opened, although just a small crack, but still an opening that SS and Medicare elimination or cuts could spur a vigilantism push. There were and are a lot of supporters for the young guy who shot the Healthcare CEO, and with the political aspect of this country these days…. well, I don’t support violence, but would not be surprised if congress or political yes voters to cut or eliminate could face the same situation. Would be devastating to this country, both the acting out and the SS /Medicare cuts.

When you have nothing left some might take desperate measures. But, I'm sure they'll find more money in the budget to pay for additional security like they did for the Justices.

Better way might be via a corporate tax increase and one that's designed to hit lower paying companies like McDonald's and don't let them hide behind trying to franchise the business either.
The companies that pay workers enough so that the workers can actually live on it and have enough left over to save on retirement should pay the less corporate taxes but if they want to go the Walmart route then they're going to start paying out fairly in one way or another.

of those drawing state and federal aid and bill the corporations for it. Maybe add a handling charge in the bill so the corporations would feel that it would be cheaper to just raise their minimum pay.

most states benefits primarily are based on having children and being low to moderate income.

I'm honestly surprised how low the percentage of tax revenue is that comes from corporations. Combine that with the tax cuts for the very wealthy, and it's obvious that there's a huge chunk of change that could be brought in by raising the rates just a bit and removing more loopholes. But since the R's don't want to look at the revenue side, it's not going to happen.

and not ONCE did I hit a "cut off" during the year and stopped paying. In fact being self employed and having employee's I paid DOUBLE for most of those years.

EVERYONE should pay into the system EVERY week like I did.

fair share as they were already paying 70% - 90% taxes already.

In fact, most pay a lower percentage in taxes than the average McDonald's employee. They can well afford to pay more in SS taxes now. 😉

the portion of income exceeding the cutoff for the highest bracket.

for the sum of all personal + employer contributions for all living future and current recipients (including eligible survivors) along with the compounded interest they would have gotten if their contributions were given a reasonable interest rate based on the Fed rate + a small increment (maybe 1-2%)

If they are going to kill the system, they should have to return all funds in 1) above with all compounded interest/dividends, preferably tax-free in one massive check (no spreading it out over 10 years, for example). If they can't even do that, it's just out and out theft.

I'll take that deal over zero any day and then buy a small place overseas to relocate.

If I wanted to read some republican's blabbering I would go to one of their nazi wbsites.

DITTO.
He is my current Gov. The next sycophant has been elected here and is waiting in the wings to mess up NH more.
Kelly Ayotte. You may remember her following Lindsy Graham around with her head up his butt the last time she held a senate office. A one time senator at that. She got sent home because of her stance on abortion.

... were enforced with Fear-of-God righteousness, and politicians were to face real consequences for "borrowing" from it with no intention of ever repaying the the money, there would be no insolvency issue. The Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 specifically forbids the inclusion of SS monies in General Budget calculations. Social Security is a closed system, and would be secure if Republicans kept their filthy hands out of the cookie jar. And the fact that there is any cap on withholding – it's $160,000 at the moment, I believe –is an obscenity. But Republican thievery is dismissed in much the same manner as, "Oh, that's just Trump being Trump", as if that bullshit phrase excuses anything. It does not.
Republicans have wanted to abolish Social Security since the day it was enacted, because they are fundamentally dishonest, greedy people, or they wouldn't be Republicans. Funny, they don't seem to have a problem with supremely profitable oil companies receiving billions in government subsidies every fucking year. Go figure.

Dubya campaigned saying he wouldn't touch the Social Security trust fund unless we were attacked, got into a war or there was an economic downturn.

Then 9/11 happened, he started Iraq War II, and the economy plummeted.

With a smirk he would entertain his wealthy dinner guests with, "I hit the trifecta."

And they applauded.

The Democrats have got to start calling this bullshit out. They need to state over and over that Social Security is not allowed, by law, to add even a dime to the deficit (not to say it hasn’t added to the debt because Congress has continued to borrow out of the SS Trust Fund, and so, they owe it billions).

Say that over and over, in every interview and press conference. Otherwise, the Reichwing douchebags will convince the…ignorant masses…of the need to take a cut to their earned benefits. Once that happens, the precedent is set, and we are all well and truly fucked.

Tax cuts on income is off the table. Deal?

Take disposable income out of almost 56 million
people's pockets and hey look, a recession. Jeez
Republicans are lousy economists.

and taxed every dollar for SS, reQublicans would still claim SS was insolvent and needed benefit cuts.

When tax payer money goes to the lower class it's called welfare. When it goes to those at the top it's called subsides. At the local level it's called economic development.

force companies to pay pensions. No exceptions. We can't leave the next generations hanging...

47 months and counting

Frame the situation. Don’t wait!

Definitely, Chris. Our Social Security should be cut. Because here I am luxuriating on an $1100 a month "entitlement," (which has been taken out of my paycheck weekly for the past half century). So; $1100 a month X 12 months equals $13200 per year. Wow!
Forgive me for my "greed!"

It SHOULD have been in Al Gore's "lock box."

Last edited Tue Dec 31, 2024, 04:29 AM - Edit history (2)

exceed SS income.
https://www.ssa.gov/oact/trsum/